I'm sorry, but I fail to see how this disgusting "film" is even remotely decent. Can you even call this garbage a film? Absolutely not! It's a disgrace to Tolkien's classic. A shameless cash grab trilogy, solely for the purpose of merchandising through cheap Lego toys and Denny's meals. And speaking of which, WHY is it a trilogy? There is simply nowhere near enough material to justify THREE THREE HOUR LONG "films" even with the added stuff from the appendices, which only causes an unbalanced tone and useless exposition. Just awful. -5/10, and that's being kind. One of the worst "films" ever made, save for The Last Airbender.

Can you tell us why this movie is such a piece of garbage? You do know the definition of film, right? Why isn't there enough material for three films? I need info. Not rants. "It was like a great shadow, in the middle of which was a dark form, of man shape maybe, yet greater; and a power and terror seemed to be in it and go before it." ~FotR

Each to their own and all that, but i found your venomous hate towards the film rather silly.

One of the worst films ever made? Please..... you know thats nonsense. “I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.” - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring

LMAO. Then surely you hated all of the Rings adaptations as well. The opening 40 minutes to an hour of this movie
[In reply to]

Can't Post

were magnificent (minus the overuse of Frodo). Short of seeing the Dragon in his fullness, one could hardly have asked for a more well delivered Erebor scene. The Unexpected party was VERY true to the book, and was chillingly wondrous in its use of the Lonely Mountain song.

There were flaws in this film. For me they came mainly in the form of the major deviations from the actual appendices, though Rings was certainly not void of departures either. The troll snot and the bird dung were over the top, and I could have done without them. But they were hardly deal breakers. Hardly a minority in sight, but again, see also The Rings trilogy.

There was a lighter tone, but it fit, and it was appropriate, this being The Hobbit not The Return of The King. Each to his own, but this film was better than The Avengers, which was quite enjoyable.

In Reply To

I'm sorry, but I fail to see how this disgusting "film" is even remotely decent. Can you even call this garbage a film? Absolutely not! It's a disgrace to Tolkien's classic. A shameless cash grab trilogy, solely for the purpose of merchandising through cheap Lego toys and Denny's meals. And speaking of which, WHY is it a trilogy? There is simply nowhere near enough material to justify THREE THREE HOUR LONG "films" even with the added stuff from the appendices, which only causes an unbalanced tone and useless exposition. Just awful. -5/10, and that's being kind. One of the worst "films" ever made, save for The Last Airbender.

"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."

sound to a rolkien fan, some people regard TH as a truly horrid film. And im not talking about trolls, normal people with opinions.

Earlier today someone i know expressed his dislike of TH in no kinder a manner than this poster : one of the worst films he had ever seen.

Exotic for me, of course, but its interetsing to hear how he hated the dwarves and halfway through the film he was already rooting for the whole company to die screaming. Vous commencez à m'ennuyer avec le port!!!

I can't believe you would talk about The Last Airbender that way!! That was the best film that M. Night Shyamalan released that whole year! ...a far green country under a swift sunrise. As the ship approached the edge of the world and the undying lands came into view, Frodo could not help but wonder: "How long? How long? How long to the Point of Know Return?